On 21 September 2018 at 08:19, Juan A. Suarez Romero <jasua...@igalia.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2018-09-20 at 20:16 +0200, Bas Nieuwenhuizen wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 7:33 PM Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@intel.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > On Thursday, 2018-09-20 19:17:57 +0200, Bas Nieuwenhuizen wrote: >> > > Was missing the init, found by Emil. >> > > >> > > Fixes: d17443a4593 "radv: Use build ID if available for cache UUID." >> > >> > Reviewed-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@intel.com> >> > >> > > CC: <mesa-sta...@lists.freedesktop.org> >> > >> > Cc'ing mesa-stable has no effect when you're already adding the >> > proper Fixes: tag :) >> >> Last time I asked about the difference between Fixes and CC, the >> conclusion I got that Fixes is only best effort for the stable >> branches and that if it does not apply it will be dropped silently, >> while for the CC ones the release manager will notify you. >> > > In previous releases that was the way it worked: we always our best effort to > apply CC and Fixes patches. The difference was that if we couldn't apply the > patch, then we were only notifying in the pre-announcement "Rejected" section > about the CC, and silently ignoring the Fixes. > > > But nowadays, we notify about all the candidates to stable, which are CC and > Fixes. > Here is an alternative wording, hopefully it will make things clearer:
Both CC and Fixes work and having both does not hurt. Fixes provides clear indication when/where the problem originates. Cc _explicitly_ requests the patch to be in stable - that's why we have the list + late nominations. It _explicit_ nomination does _not_ apply then the nominator is informed. -Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
